Let's say I'm handling a paper which has been reviewed, but the reviews are incomplete. For example:

• The journal needs N reviews as a policy and I only have N-1 reviews.
• The journal needs at least one reviewer who isn't a suggested reviewer, and all the reviews so far have been by suggested reviewers.
• The reviewer said they weren't confident about [section] in the paper, and I need to invite another reviewer with expertise in [section].
• The reviews received are poor quality and I can't make a decision based on them.

However, I've yet to start looking for these missing reviews. If I do so, the timeline will be like handling a manuscript from scratch: I have to invite reviewers, wait for them to accept, invite others if they decline, and so on. Alternatively, I can make a revise decision now and get the missing reviews when the manuscript is resubmitted.

From the author's perspective, which is preferable?

Let's say I'm handling a paper which has been reviewed, but the reviews are incomplete. For example:

• The journal needs N reviews as a policy and I only have N-1 reviews.
• The journal needs at least one reviewer who isn't a suggested reviewer, and all the reviews so far have been by suggested reviewers.
• The reviewer said they weren't confident about [section] in the paper, and I need to invite another reviewer with expertise in [section].

However, I've yet to start looking for these missing reviews. If I do so, the timeline will be like handling a manuscript from scratch: I have to invite reviewers, wait for them to accept, invite others if they decline, and so on. Alternatively, I can make a revise decision now and get the missing reviews when the manuscript is resubmitted.

From the author's perspective, which is preferable?